| reorganising in a way that flows slightly better to the eye |
| Worth noting that whilst the bar charts they have used are easy to read, they might not be representative of any distribution in results. Alternatives might be histograms or violin plots. |
| Show data points in scatterplot or box plot |
| I think the figure legend could be more detailed |
| The scales on the bar charts are all different so at a glance makes the results seem more similar |
| better spacing more accurate number |
| Could box off panels to make more distinct from one another; |
| Perhaps the error bars on panel B were too large i.e. took up half the space on the graph and could’ve been presented differently |
| Re-organized |
| remove the numbers on the bars, have all backgrounds the same colour eg white or black in Figure C, have a chart at the side displaying what colour of bar is what group instead of putting each group name on each bar, remove the lines showing what the ** are referring to in Figure B and the ns sign in Figure E. |
| Colour shading could be improved, difficult to distinguish between subset of bars |
| Colour scheme could be easier to see - could be difficult to tell the difference in shades |
| I think the colours in the bar charts could be clearer. |
| I believe if dot plots were also plotted so you could see first hand the variation of the data sets. |
| roviding clear visual representations, detailed legends, and contextual information will aid in communicating the significance of the research. |
| make bar section for A18 on part E as well |
| simplify each colour section |
| The layout of the different components of the figure could be improved. It is not appealing and does not flow very well, making it a bit harder to interpret. To improve the components should all be of equal size which may make it easier to follow. |
| no idea |
| it can be improved by making the text size consistent throughout |
| unsure |
| Not sure how to fix because they are comparing so many bars in B |
| n/a |
| More text on the diagrams, the layout of the various diagrams can be adjusted so that they can be better compared with each other to convey meaning |
| keep all the different kinds of figures together e.g. bar graphs along side bar graphs, images along side images |
| making the figures easier to read |
| maybe less is more |
| molecular weight |
| I think it is presented well. |
| Presenting all the graphs in the same size, making use of more white space as well as using a box plot combined with scatter plot or at least use scatter and the bar. |
| better use of colours |
| Not sure |
| not sure |
| Mention the N numbers either on the graphs or in the legend instead of just saying at least 3. Maybe try and use other symbols to represent significance lines and clarify what’s being compared in the legend, for example in figure B, it’s mostly just significance lines which clutters the whole graph and makes it look more complicated than it is. |
| Same colour/shade for same concentration of a particular constituant |
| bigger labels maybe |
| Use box and whisker plots with data points overlayed? |
| Maybe grouping together certain parts of the data to allow better comparison |
| there isnt much difference in the colour gradient of the green, changing the middle column to a slightly darker colour would make the difference more clear |
| No requirement to state no significance. |
| Figure E need a bit of correction as it might be better labelled |
| n/a |
| not sure :/ |
| Could be spaced out more, quite cramped |
| I wouldve liked to see the actual scale bar with the values on the visualisations of the fibroblasts and not just on the figure legend, but this could make the figure look a bit too busy. |
| The layout can be improved. Put the same kind of charts together. |
| Split into smaller grouped info |
| make all parts the same size |
| explaining any abbreviations e.g. DMSO |
| Individual data points could be shown. Perhaps a boxplot with jittered scatter plot. |
| N/A |
| split up into separate figures to make info more digestable |
| The data presentation in this figure could be improved by increasing the font size of labels and numbers in the bar graphs for better readability, and explicitly stating the exact sample sizes for each condition in the legend. |
| more what to look at instructions of the immunofluorescence confocol image |
| a few things i would do differently would be the stats. the way they are layed out makes it harder to read for me personally but i can see how this might be useful for other people |
| the treatment length was different for each group, should been the same, because then they are not really comparable. |
| n/a |